2. It is recognized that there is a need to punish the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties, such as the instant case, and that there is two victimized police officers, and that the Defendant did not reach an agreement with the victimized police officers, etc. in order to establish a judgment and establish a state’s legal order and order and eradicate the light of public authority.

However, comprehensively taking account of the following factors: (a) the Defendant’s recognition of and reflects on the instant crime; (b) the primary offender who has no criminal records; and (c) the economic condition, age, character and conduct, environment; (d) circumstances after the Defendant committed the instant crime; and (e) whether there was any change in the circumstances after the sentence of the lower judgment, etc., the lower court’s punishment appears to be within a reasonable and appropriate scope; and (e) it cannot be deemed unreasonable

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.